California Forever Project Deserves Consideration Despite Concerns About Secretive Land Acquisition
Source: https://www.nytimes.com/by/the-ezra-klein-show. "Opinion | Katie Porter on the California Forever Project - The New York Times." May 12, 2026. www.nytimes.com
The Gist
Porter argues that California should seriously consider the California Forever project because the state desperately needs new approaches to housing beyond just apartments or single-family homes. While she acknowledges concerns about how the land was acquired, she believes the project's potential to demonstrate innovative housing models outweighs those concerns.
Conclusion
The California Forever project should be evaluated on its merits as a potential housing innovation, despite legitimate concerns about how the land was acquired
Premises
- California needs housing innovation beyond the current limited options of high-rise apartments versus single-family homes
- Master-planned communities like Irvine demonstrate that controlling multiple development factors can enable successful large-scale housing growth
- Some local opposition to California Forever stems from NIMBYism rather than legitimate planning concerns
- The project's stated goal of demonstrating new models of living, working, and recreation addresses a real need for housing imagination
- Traditional development processes are often stymied by litigation, as shown by the Tejon Ranch example where 30+ years of efforts have been blocked
- Direct engagement and detailed evaluation are necessary before making judgments about the project
Assumptions
- The California Forever developers are acting in good faith when they claim to want housing innovation
- Master-planned communities can be successfully scaled and replicated
- Housing shortage is a significant enough problem to justify considering unconventional solutions
- NIMBYism is a major obstacle to housing development in California
- Innovation in housing models is inherently valuable